The Route to Best Science in Implementation of the Endangered Species Act’s Consultation Mandate: The Benefits of Structured Effects Analysis

Abstract

The Endangered Species Act is intended to conserve at-risk species and the ecosystems upon which they depend, and it is premised on the notion that if the wildlife agencies that are charged with implementing the statute use the best available scientific information, they can successfully carry out this intention. We assess effects analysis as a tool for using best science to guide agency decisions under the Act. After introducing effects analysis, we propose a framework that facilitates identification and use of the best available information in the development of agency determinations. The framework includes three essential steps—the collection of reliable scientific information, the critical assessment and synthesis of available data and analyses derived from those data, and the analysis of the effects of actions on listed species and their habitats. We warn of likely obstacles to rigorous, structured effect analyses and describe the extent to which independent scientific review may assist in overcoming these obstacles. We conclude by describing eight essential elements that are required for a successful effects analysis.

Government Accountability Office (2003) Endangered species: Fish and Wildlife Service uses best available science to make listing decisions, but additional guidance is needed for critical habitat designations

Sunstein, C (2002) Risk and reason: safety, law and the environment. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2001) Biological/conference opinion regarding the effects of operation of the Bureau of Reclamation’s Klamath project on the endangered Lost River Sucker (Deltistes luxatus), endangered shortnose sucker (Chasmistes brevirostris), threatened bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and proposed critical habitat for the Lost River/shortnose suckers

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2008) Biological opinion on the proposed coordinated operations of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2009) Response to the Family Farm Alliance Information Quality Act (IQA) Appeal of the Draft Effects Analysis of the Biological Opinion on the Continued Long-Term Operations of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP)

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service (1998) Endangered species consultation handbook